Search form

Search

Locational Privacy

Locational Privacy

Modern communications mean most individuals today walk around with a beacon that transmits their location. Mobile phones register to a nearby tower as the owner moves through space and the phone company can collect that data in real time or retrospectively to physically place the phone with varying degrees of accuracy. Companies can also determine the owner of every handset within range of a particular tower. GPS enabled phones enable far more precise location placement. Many cars now have GPS devices installed some of which transmit the vehicle’s location to a centralized service. As the devices get cheaper and smaller law enforcement agencies can more easily attach GPS trackers to cars and individuals enabling precise round-the-clock surveillance without ever leaving the precinct. Location-based services including maps of nearby restaurants friend finders and other social networks collect location data as part of providing the service or for contextual advertising.

EFF is fighting to protect the privacy and prevent the misuse of this data that users of phones GPS transmitters and location-based services leak to providers and to the government. In our cell tracking and GPS tracking cases we advocate that the law protect this information by requiring police to get a search warrant before obtaining this sensitive data. We also work to ensure that location based service providers don’t abuse the information they collect on their customers or hand it off to other companies or the police without consent or probable cause.

“That can very easily be used to track people’s location history,” said Lee Tien, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a San Francisco nonprofit that supports civil liberties in the high-tech arena. “It’s something people just don’t think about, that the system knows where you are and when you...

The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts recently held that officers may not place GPS tracking devices on cars without first getting a warrant. The case, Commonwealth v. Connolly, was decided under the state corollary to the Fourth Amendment, and its reasoning may influence pending GPS tracking cases, including United...

Privacy advocates are rightly concerned. Corporations and the government can keep track of what political meetings people attend, what bars and clubs they go to, whose homes they visit. It is the fact that people’s locations are being recorded “pervasively, silently, and cheaply that we’re worried about,” the Electronic Frontier...

The New York Times today has a nice opinion piece by Adam Cohen that does a good job of laying out the concerns about locational privacy that EFF and other privacy advocates have raised:
A little-appreciated downside of the technology revolution is that, mainly without thinking about it, we...

The problem with the location-based services is that it affects a skittishness in people. Concepts like location-based services that send "bits of data back to Google" tend to make people nervous. Electronic Frontier Foundation has a great report on the intersection of location services and privacy.